Intergalactic Summit

You know, Puppy, you could save some effort by putting that into your signature rather than typing it at the end of every post.

Don't be ridiculous, Oniseki.
There are millions of easier ways to kill a person instead of forcing him or her to drink poisoned tea.

You know, Puppy, you could stop barking at things you don't understand.

Let me add Steffanie's thoughts as my own, then. I trust nobody will question MY provenance as a true son of the State?

Unfortunately, from other accounts the admiral was encouraged rather strongly to take it. The option to not was removed and thus, from what I have heard, a violation of the very tradition as Verin has already pointed out.

Admiral Yanala was not being offered the alternative between an honourable suicide or a dishonourable trial. Only at the very end did Heth-hnolku lose his common touch, always before he knew what the common Citizen would feel on a subject. He knew what would happen if Admiral Yanala, our generation's Tovil-Toba, was put on trial.

He was offering her the choice between an honourable suicide or a disappearing.

But... is it a gallentean, who tells me, that I am blinded?
Gallentean, that follows democratic ideals? Who prefer hedonism over efficiency? Who prefers freedom over duties and loyalties? Who prefers individualism over working for the sake of society? Gallentean, who can't see that working for the larger entity that you are part of instead of working for yourself, in the end strengthens your society, and thus you even further than your working for you alone? Gallentean, who can't see stupidity of a government system, ruling by grey mass of mediocre populations? Where philosophers and scientists can be judged by a hundred of janitors and traders? Gallenteans, who can't see their own flaws and trying to implement their deranged system onto others? Gallenteans, who can't even see that they break their own ideals of freedom? And those, who can't see that the real freedom is the chaos, evil and destruction? Gallenteans, who are blind to other merits, if they can't conform to gallentish ideals?

But Heth-haan is not a myth. He is the man.
And his merits are not myths. They are documented deeds and qualities.

But besides all that, your claim that "I have forgotten the basic tradition and ways of my own people" really makes you, who are blind. Or maybe not blind, but just trolling... so, could you answer please, are you blind regarding this matter or are you trying to simply troll me? It could save me some time talking to you, you see...


You have no idea what soul I do have, and you have no idea about our people. It might be a surprise to you, that I have many kirjuun, who respect me and whom I respect, who can give their lives for me, and for whom I will die for. Unfortunately, this place is a bad thing to judge about Caldari society.

As for some few traitorous gallentean bootlickers, pretending to be loyal to the State on one hand and backstabbing with the other, the hell with them. I do not need respect from the scum.
All enemies of the State will die.


If there is something that I should be blamed in, I will face the consequences and the punishment as a soldier.
But it is not for you to decide.

And about distorted reality, who would say it, but not a brainwashed gallentean, who believes in such rotten things as democracy, freedom and liberty.

The only reason I'm not furious with you for putting my loyalty into question is the fact that nothing you've said on this subject is even remotely sane.

Fortunately you do not get to decide who is a State Loyalist. Neither does Heth.
The State is no one person, the State is all of us.

I assure you, if the exchange is heated, it is only heated on your end.

Regardless - funds were transferred to a non-corporate account without the authorization of the Board. Being CEO does not automatically give a person unlimited freedom to do whatever they wish with the corporate funds and call it valid. The CEO may be invested with authority, but that authority is not unlimited, nor does it render them technically incapable of embezzlement or corruption.

If your legal counsel advises you that it is functionally impossible for a CEO to embezzle, then I advise you fire them and hire somebody competent.

Standing on a gallentean side is not sane.
Blaming honorable and merited Tibus Heth is not sane.
As for me, I do not put your loyalty into question, you did it yourself for me.
You have chosen to stand on gallentean side, not me.
You called Heth-haan "hnolku", not me.
You choose your loyalties, not me.


No, I don't. I am simple soldier of the State, who destroys enemies of the State and those, who compromise their loyalties or stand on my way.
Will you compromise your loyalty or not, is for you and only you to decide.

Today, I stubbed my toe on a piece of metal. When I leaned down to examine it, I saw it bore the Caldari Steel logo!

This is why the State must be destroyed.

Hakatain-haan; as you like. That said, after discussing things with counsel, I believe we're both taking a rather un-subtle read of this situation. I will attempt to clarify doctrinal points as they arise. Please bear with me. I'm not a legal scholar, and so I may not be as artful or clear in discussing these points as we may all wish. There was a lot that came up in my conversation with counsel.

The very short version: embezzlement is murder to criminal negligence's manslaughter. Heth is guilty of the latter, not the former.

The questions to answer with regard to embezzlement: was Heth acting with the permission of the board to allocate funds? Was the accounting accurate and forthright? Was he self-dealing, or acting in his own self-interest?

In the first place, while you are certainly right that transfer of funds without the board of director's approval is a key element in embezzlement, you are evidently stating that the Kaalakiota board of directors was not aware of the transfer of funds to the Providence Directorate. As the Providence Directorate was formed in YC110 as a conglomerate of Kaalakiota and Ytiri in plain view of the public, there is no reasonable way for the KK board to contend that they were not aware of KK assets being employed by the Providence Directorate. The KK board has not ever, to my knowledge, protested the establishment of the Providence Directorate. As such, we can only assume that embezzlement occurred as a product of the scale of funds being sent to the Provists by Heth.

In which case, I posit several questions: did Caldari Funds Unlimited miss the appropriation of funds to the Providence Directorate when auditing KK? It is standard practice for major creditors to audit corporations to which they extend funds. It is highly unlikely that they would have missed something as significant as a challenge to KK's profitability, given the amount of funds involved. Did the KK board of directors fail to identify financial irregularities during yearly audits? SEC filings for any publicly-traded corporation would require that those corporations undergo regular audits by a certified independent auditor. Even if that information was deemed proprietary, it would surely be reviewed by the KK board and other investors, creditors, and other interested parties. Was it missed then?

If the KK board of directors was unaware of the scale Heth's appropriation of funds, then they were negligent to a remarkable degree. The alternative is that they were aware of Heth's appropriations and either approved of them, or that they were aware of the appropriations and were unable to challenge them as they were under duress.

It is doubtful that the board would not have so much as protested or made statements indicating a desire to reform Kaalakiota practices with regard to the Providence Directorate when KK financial difficulties came to light. Indeed, the charge of embezzlement was only leveled well after Heth's flight.

Secondly, there is the question of malfeasance. Let me apologize for misusing this term earlier; it's a question of mental state, of 'malign intent,' where before I was thinking of criminal negligence.

Was Heth operating with an intent to defraud KK for his own gain, or the gain of his compatriots? The specific rule to apply here is termed the business judgment rule. In brief, we must establish that Heth was clearly in breach of his fiduciary duties of good faith, loyalty, or due care.

On the matter of good faith, we have no argument. However much we disagree with Heth's militarism or his seething hatred of the Gallente, it is impossible to argue that he didn't believe that funding the KK-Ytiri conglomerate known as the Caldari Providence Directorate was in the best interest of KK, and the best interest of the State. He believed it firmly, thoroughly, and operated on that belief.

On the fiduciary duty of loyalty, we must establish that Heth's funding of the Providence Directorate wasn't of self-interest. This is questionable, but I would contend that Heth did not fund the Providence Directorate for his own benefit. As an extension of the basis of his good faith, we must cede the duty of loyalty to him. We can't establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Heth was not operating in what he believed was the interest of KK and the State.

The duty of care is one that we can challenge Heth on. A reasonable person, when confronted with the diverting of funds to the Providence Directorate, would see that this would negatively impact Kaalakiota financial standing. This would be basis for a charge of negligence. At the same time, it could reasonably be argued that Heth was taking care to ensure the defense of KK assets against on-going aggression by the Gallente, by means of a new KK-Ytiri conglomerate -- and considering that the business judgment doctrine presumes strongly in the favor of the defendent, it would be difficult to presume otherwise.

In brief, the KK board has a very weak claim that Heth embezzled funds. Unless there is a complete, systematic failure of the board's checks, they were aware of the funds' use at the very least, and actively approved at most. Even if he acted without their explicit consent, so long as he wasn't acting in self-interest, the only reasonable basis for failure on Heth's part was a breach of his duty of care. He is very clearly negligent in his fiduciary duty.

He did not, however, embezzle funds, in the technical sense of the term. He may have been a terrible CEO. He may have been a traitor to the Caldari way of life. But he didn't embezzle.